posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by WolfofWar
How is he choosing who to test though? Where is he doing this research? I could spend 20 years in an area near a very well to do university and show
an increase in IQ or I could go and spend 20 years in a rundown area with nothing more than a failing public school and show the opposite.
He has done a mixture of data collection techniques, using universities social economists and psychology departments to go out and do surveys and do
testing (they do this regardless, he takes their data and compiled them in for research.) the data is varied, peer reviewed, and in broad scope,
essentially the opposite of how your data collection technique you stated is. I do like that you bring up the variety and drastic differences based on
location, background, and data broadness. It is true, you will receive a different data set if you go to one narrow avenue or the other. It's odd
though that you seem to support this poll though, which we have little data on, and is done by a group for political purposes and not for general
That is the difference between a broad data set (Flynns work) and a narrow data set (some pollster interviewing 100 people in one area.)
You mentioned they could have asked, “Newly arrived Chinese immigrants”. They might well have asked the average Joe in a city near you or
Difference how so?
Differences in upbringing, culture, and history. I laid it out pretty specifically already. The